Active Community: Message List

Re: Wild Rover Series Reviews

guest — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:42:58 GMT

BLavine wrote:

I have really liked this race series in the past and this year was no exception.

One minor gripe- At the Hynes 5-miler, they ran out of XXL and XL shirts. Why ask for my size at registration if you're not going to have a shirt for me?

There is good news and bad news in the road racing industry relative to shirts. A large number of the great technical shirts that are becoming common at races are made off-shore, places like Mexico and the orient. Amazing prices compared to what technical shirts cost even 5 years go. In many cases, material is colored, cut, sewn, printed or embroidered to order.

With the traditional cotton shirts, a zillion shirts are manufactured using very consistent sizing patterns and equipment. Those shirts are bought by all the different shirts makers. The technical shirts don't seem to be of any consistent sizing, even from the same manufacturer on 2 different orders.

The shirts at the Hynes were all way too small, so runners were sizing up. The medium I got wasn't even close, so I question whether even a large would have been large enough for me. It's no wonder that those larger sizes became scarce.

Contrast that with all the shirts for the Applefest Half Marathon last fall. All way too big with the XL and XXL being tents.Yet the volunteer shirts from same manufacturer we too small. Go figure.

I work with many races and as I such this sort of issue is common to many conversation about race management. Quite often the delivered shirts don't even match the samples.

What's the solution? Don't know, there are a lot of very sharp experienced people trying find a way around it.

At least a large cotton Haynes Beefy Tee is a large no matter which shirt company sells the goods.

Going back to cotton would seem like a like a good idea, but the color options available with technical are very many, and color is part of today's pazazze.

Re: The iPod conflict brews in racing

guest — Wed, 21 May 2008 14:47:55 GMT

<<<< Also, he called me "Mr. Rocket Scientist" casting aspursions toward my intelligence

Being intelligent has never been a guarantee that people's "Its' all about ME" selfish nature won't be the driving force when those people have an agenda. In your case, "I want to run with my headphones and I will do so even if I have to sully my own honor by knowingly signing a race waiver (agreement) which forbids the use of a banned devices."

As a race manager I have a responsibility to the runners, the rest of the race committee, the sponsoring and/or managing organization and the city or town in which an event is staged, to not put any of them in harms way either physically or financially if I can knowingly do something to mitigate potential risks. Headphones are distracting regardless of the venue and you know it. If you don't, god help us as you go about your daily work.

Does your selfish cause to wear headphones outweigh that of a greater scope? I hope you don't bring your logic to work with you.

Re: The iPod conflict brews in racing

guest — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:40:52 GMT

<<<I guess I don't understand the big stink.

The only stink is the one rule breakers bring. It's the same stink that socially uncooperative people bring to any gathering. The stink isn't there until you get there. Not much to understand. Seems pretty clear to me.

<<< I would imagine "elite" runners are mentally absorbed with stride counts, breath counts, listening for footsteps, etc.

"Imagination" can be faulty. "elite" folks in any endeavor generally do what they do without all the seemingly conscious stuff that people like you attribute to them. Just another example of things you don't understand.

<< Therefore, I look at the rules that say "no iPods" and ignore them, which is as it should be.

So, it's all about you. Right?

<<<I can tell you one thing, the first race to actively kick someone out for using an iPod would be a freakin' ghost town on the next running.

Well Mr rocket scientist, you'd be wrong because the events that are enforcing the rules are selling out earlier and earlier as they always have.

You see, the IPOD thing really doesn't matter in the end to you loud mouths because you are not going to pass up the better races just to spite essentially nobody but you. More and more races have figured out that the PR has not hurt any race yet because you twits are spinning in the wind independently with no way to really cause any sizable group problem. And there are plenty of runners to replace you in the registration queue anyway. You complainers are being seen as insignificant when it comes down to it. Emotional blackmail is seldom effective after the initial assault. It just takes most managers longer to realize they were pandering to you guys when their event is more important in the end. You loose.

<<NHSenior, I can understand your objection, and if your goal is to keep running "pure" and unsullied by the unwashed masses (myself included) then you are destined to be running in very lonely races.

It has nothing to do with purity, it has to do with safety and liability exposure in the end. You guys bring up all the other issues and because people like me happen to comment on your other issues you so you incorrectly say that we think they are germane to the main safety/liability. there are not germane at all.

<<<< You won't meet a bigger bunch of rule-oriented people than the Marine Corps. If they don't have a problem with it, then why should you?

Well a personal real world answer would be one your parents probably told you (or should have told you) many times. "If Johnny's parents let him jump off the cliff, that's up to them. We aren't going to let you do it." . Should I continue to talk to you like the denied child you are acting like?

Perhaps the MC doesn't get involved in the rules because the MC does not own nor manage the Marine Corp Marathon (Did you know that?). Not enforcing rules does sound a bit out of character for the MC which should have had bells going off in your head that maybe the MC does not call the shots in that event. They bless it but don't manage it. Closed courses are a different issue when it comes to safety, but the increasing congestion and increased ipod use are conspiring to make "incidences" more noticable even on closed courses. What's happened is that non-ipod users are actually paying more attention to the misqueues, cut offs and cluelessness that ipods carry around them like a fog. Like I've told many of the previouse pro-ipod posters, more noise about the issue please. It's working.

Got any more well thought out stuff for us.

Re: The iPod conflict brews in racing

guest — Sun, 11 May 2008 18:34:19 GMT

<<<<to start running these USATF races as BANDIT RUNNERS. yep i just said it. don't pay for the race, don't wear a number, just show up and run and laugh when you run across the finish line knowing in your heart you accomplished this race.

And, you lowlife weasle, you will just have screwed up the finish order and scoring results for others. When it is not a chip race you create a real mess for everyone. Aren't you just ever so special. Yessiree, the other runners who paid and volunteer race management are just folks that you feel you can screw over.

<<< it's a free country and you can run where you want.

Lovely incorrect assumption that bandits always make.

When events get permits to encumber roads and other areas for special use, one of things they get is some control over who can be included and how can be excluded. Ever notice that protesters get arrested at events. How do think that happens and under what set of rules. Since, as a bandit, you don't become an official part of the race, your are not covered by the event insurance. That may be fine with you, but the city and town are not so happy about uninsured peole so that is just one of the many reasons why the "official" police can and sometimes do become an official arm of the event. "If" a race got upset enough they could have your sorry butt arrested if you made enough of a public stink about not leaving the area if asked.

So just because most RDs are too timid to deal with you, they can if they wanted to. In this life, you need to know where you stand before you make bold moves. Way too many people hear rnd believe the urban legends about "rights". You have fewer than you think when you decided to act like an AH, and it should be no surprise to many following this thread that I just love it when your type get a real world education at an event. Doesn't happen often enough for me but when it does, it is ever so sweet.

BTW, if you and others don't like my tone, perhaps you should not be or support (by shooting the messenger) lowlifes like this guy.

Re: The iPod conflict brews in racing

guest — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:02:14 GMT

<<<<< And to think there are likely some readers out there who were salivating over the prospect that this might have been true............

Certainly not thinking such a thing because unlike you guys I "KNOW" what is going on behind the scenes. Like I've said the USATF has cowardly ducked the issue for this year and you guys lap up their inclusiveness sounding "statements". They don't believe what they are saying for half a second but they are wimps who eventually will suck it up and ignore all the emotional blackmail being spewed from those who would ruin something for their own pleasure. They will have no choice either through an insurance provider crackdown or perhaps sooner from an even higher authority. Read on.

The comforting truth is that the IAAF is now turning up the gas on the issue. They don't give a hoot about what runners think and have never been known to be effected by "threats". In fact they tend to react in entirely the opposite direction of what those who threaten them hope. Definately my kind of people. If you don't know what I'm talking about, do a few googles searches about the London Marathon and ipod.

If the IAAF says NO then every "serious" marathon on the planet will get in line or lose the participation of the running elite and whether some of you guys hold the elite in disdain or not, they ultimately call the tune in this running sport which, after all, IS about competition in the end. and yes it is ironic that I used the term "call the tune" in the previous sentence.

Re: The iPod conflict brews in racing

guest — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:07:16 GMT

<<<<"my kind". We function at a transcendent level of integrity, moral courage and honor you simply cannot comprehend and will never approach in your life.

Those 3 values are not something you get to modify at your own pleasure, nor do you get to issue qualifications (excuses to the contrary) in how they apply post-analysis to the actions of those wasting character values on things they could have avoided.

That's pure Bill Clintonese right up there with the "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"

It's not that complicated. You either honor what you agree to or you don't. It is a black and white subject. Anything else is just "spin" and spin is defacto dishonesty by its very nature.

<<<<<No matter how high you think your moral ground of Ipod lecturing is.

It was never about the inanimate "thing" (the ipod). It was about the person using it and then as the true colors of the character of those persons using the ipod came through they started selling away their moral values to justify going back on their word.

You can continue to try to convince them and yourself with your claim of a high ground because you disapprove of inflammatory rhetoric, but there is no salvaging a squandered character or trust. Words are just words, but actions are actions. People of real character don't buy the smooth talk bit. They go on actions. Sticks and stones,,,,, all the chew toys notwithstanding.

I know you think you ever so "slick" and maybe you even flatter yourself to think of yourself as "Existential" in your rationalization of character values. One author claimed Clinton was beyond slick and might be call "Existenial" Willie, but that was far from a compliment.

Re: The iPod conflict brews in racing

guest — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:29:06 GMT

<<<Truly when I look at what my brother has been through, it makes the NH's of the world seem rather small and unimportant

As I have stated many times way back, I truly appreciate and understand what our military folks do for us. They deserve nothing less than our full support and honor for what they do.

However, speaking of honor, you get no points for your association or kinship with your brother for the honor he "deserves". Your honor is sullied and unfortunately, once sullied it can't be recovered. Don't you remember being told as a youngster not to do or engaging in things that might haunt you later and perhaps for the rest of your life.

You and a number of others have engaged in either of the two follow actions.

1) you have claimed that you have or will ignore rules of conduct to which you had a choice to not ignore, or you claim you have or will sign an agreement and then ignore it, and most often ignore it because you have and "excuse.

2) you don't or would not engage in the items stated in (1) but are a defender of the such abhorrent behavior and do so by shooting messengers and spinning a very pointed position of the messenger into a whole life style. Which of course is the practice of those who have no other weapons of defense.

Perhaps if when you feel like you have accomplish something laudable but are upset that someone tosses that aside as being of value, you might re-think your attitude toward how people perceive unacceptable social behavior. When you are a rule breaker and can't be trusted or are a defender of same, there are people who will cut you out of decision processes that effect your life and you may never even know it. People who have reason to include others in social or employment activities quite often discount people they can not trust.

RK would have you think he doesn't understand someone like me. I don't believe it for a second and he doesn't either (more disingenuousness). I understand him perfectly and the rest of his kind. They don't like people who call attention to their short comings on honor and trust and moral values. They think that because they have had a hard life or work hard at other things that life will give them a special dispensation for a wimpy attitude on moral values. That's where this thread started and where it has always been for me. The silly side comments are spurious. Honor is for life until you lose it.

Parker, hello. Isn't it about time for an "OMG" posting.?

Edited to add:

You do know that you guys control the keys to whatever grief you claim my posting either bring or don't bring.

Ipods are fine. Working hard at being healthy or healthier is fine and is laudable. Why do you have to force the combination of both in places where you are not wanted. Why not cut a deal? YOU compromise and don't use your ipod at races that have rules stating they are not to be used, and I will dry up and go away because I have no case beyond that simple issue. It's you who started this by doing what you should not do. Do you need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Re: The iPod conflict brews in racing

guest — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:52:56 GMT

<<<<Hey Team EyePod! I miss y'all! Since the conflict seems to be all brewed out, now what?! Can we take our Team EyePod feelin' the love fest off the site and form our own Team EyePod chat? Runner Chick'en knows how to contact me via my profile, so the rest of you PodHeads should be able to figure it out! Don't lose touch my EyePod Homies!

I find your comment laughably ironic. If you actually spent time in a race, not zoned out and isolated in your Ipod stupor, you would meet strangers who might know something about this sport. If that happened there are at least 2 possible results.

1) You might learn that there are many "running" web communities and most have forums which cover many topics and most might jump at the chance to create one or more Ipod threads. Your tremendously effect Team EyePod site has fallen on its ill thought out face. I guess the keeper of that site is more interested in music than getting anything done.

2) You might find yourself at the finish line having enjoyed the whole race, not noticed your claimed discomfort and found that time flew by as you enjoyed the company of and perhaps common issues you face along with other runners. Who knew that there just might be life beyond the IPOD.

Most of you ipod heads have come into the sport and NEVER run a race without the **** thing. Or in a typical no work-ethic fashion you tried it for 10 to 20 steps and gave up because running without it was "too hard" . Always looking for and finding a crutch to help accomplish things is how we've developed a whole generation of under-achievers.

Re: Getting permission to reproduce couch to 5k program

guest — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:57:44 GMT

<<<I don't think the program is copyright material. If you go to the program on this website there is nothing to suggest it is

That's how people get in trouble.

Something does not need to say it's copyrighted to actually be copyrighted.

If I have something that I have on a site and it is labeled as being copyrighted and you copy it to your site and don't label it copyrighted, then a third party is NOT off the hook if they copy the stuff from your site and use it. Sort of obvious if you thnk about it.

I think you will find that basic copyright law says that if I write something and can prove it and I was not acting as an employee or agent of another person, entity, business at the time then I do in fact have a copyright. You do not have to register a copyright on something to have it. The more formal processes just makes it easier to prove that you have the copyright when you need to stomp someone for using it without permission or using in a way that confuses the public.

On copyrights and patents, trademarks, servicemarks, business names. etc. , urban legends about "oh, don't worry about it, they won't care, it's OK", will and regularly do get people in trouble.

Re: Getting permission to reproduce couch to 5k program

guest — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:20:42 GMT

I think you will find that the copyright of the Couch to 5 program was owned by Kick Sports and all rights passed to Coolrunning (Cool Sports) when Kick Sports was sold by Josh Clark to Cool Sports many years ago. Coolrunning was sold to Active.com in Dec 2006.

Coolrunning is normally very happy to have others use the program and make links to it for non-business use, providing that the clear copyright of Coolrunining is noted whereever the program is used.

Dave Camire at Coolrunning is the keeper of keys for permission to use it. I doubt that he will refuse.